They Tried To Warn Us (Lost Video From 1984)(360P).mp4
Former KGB defector to USA reveals in 1984 the 4 stage plan to destabilize America happening NOW
Malcolm X short speech in 1963 (white liberals control the Negro)
EXCERPTS: But the Stanford team that developed PAC-MAN needed an effective way to deliver it to the lung, where COVID-19 often does the most damage. VLA COMMENT: Our research shows that the reason the LUNGS seem to be damaged by Covid-19 is because it is a NANO VIRUS. Studies show that the use of Nanotechnology in humans have a consistent problem…it damages the Lungs.
Nanovirus/Nanovaccine link: BILL GATES TALKS ABOUT THE VACCINE
Trump vs. Fauci
(Article by Matthew Cullinan Hoffman republished from LifeSiteNews.com)
Anthony Fauci and Francis Collins have been publicly promoting and defending dangerous “gain of function” studies on viruses since the first experiments of the kind were announced in 2011. Such studies, which seek to make viruses infectious in new species of mammals and even humans, were being done in the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the suspected source of the COVID-19 outbreak that is now sweeping the world – and they were being done in part with funding from the National Institutes of Health, as well as the U.S. Agency for International Development.
“Gain of Function” research seeks to take animal viruses from bats, birds, and other non-human virus carriers, and to genetically modify them to alter their mode of functioning, enabling them to become infectious in other animal species, even in humans. Medical researchers have repeatedly expressed alarm regarding such experiments, arguing that they could inadvertently cause new pandemics.
Advocates of gain of function research ultimately prevailed when the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services began to allow funding for such experiments in 2018 – a decision that was publicly applauded by Anthony Fauci, whose NIAID began paying for the research at a U.S. facility. The approval, which appears in the document “Guiding Funding Decisions about Proposed Research Involving Enhanced Potential Pandemic Pathogens” explicitly allowed for the creation of viruses that could cause a pandemic, that is, a “potential pandemic pathogen” (PPP), even one whose potency has been enhanced artificially, if certain criteria are met.
VLA Comment: You might ask why we would have our researchers take animal viruses and force them to jump species to infect humans which would otherwise not occur in nature. The answer, I heard was so that if a foreign nation develops a gain of function that allows an animal virus to infect a human…we would be prepared by doing it ourselves and then working on finding an antidote. READ MORE…
Sure enough, it finally happened.
“Today in dependency court madness, LA County Dept. of Children and Family Services (DCFS) recommended that the court remove my client’s child from their physical custody after the parent tested positive for COVID-19. This is a non-offending parent. The judge ruled in favor of DCFS and detained.” (emphasis added)
VLA COMMENT: GO TO: https://www.citizens-rights.org/
Phone number: (714) 352-5100
We are going to see some action now with Scientologist involved. YAY!!!
From Dr. Rima Lebow:
Masks: No Benefit
Cause Medical Harm
Mandated Mask Madness
This Posting from Facebook Clearly Explains Truth About Masks
Link to Share on Social Media
This Message is Re-Posted from Facebook; the original posting link is below.
I am OSHA 10&30 certified.
I don’t really know why OSHA hasn’t come forward and stopped the nonsense but I want to cover 3 things:
• N95 masks and masks with exhale ports
• surgical masks
• filter or cloth masks
Okay so upon further inspection OSHA says some masks are okay and not okay in certain situations.
If you’re working with fumes and aerosol chemicals and you give your employees the wrong masks and they get sick you can be sued.
• N95 masks: are designed for CONTAMINATED environments. That means when you exhale through N95 the design is that you are exhaling into contamination. The exhale from N95 masks are vented to breath straight out without filtration. They don’t filter the air on the way out. They don’t need to.
Conclusion: if you’re in Home Depot and the guy with COVID has N95 mask his COVID breath is unfiltered being exhaled into Home Depot (because it was designed for already contaminated environments, it’s not filtering your air on the way out)
• Surgical Mask: these masks were designed and approved for STERILE environments. The amount of particles and contaminants in the outside and indoor environments where people are clog these masks very VERY quickly. The moisture from your breath combined with the clogged mask with render it “useless” IF you come in contact with COVID and your mask traps it You become a walking virus dispenser. Every time you put your mask on you are breathing the germs from EVERYWHERE you went. They should be changed or thrown out every “20-30 minutes in a non sterile environment”
• Cloth masks: today three people pointed to their masks as the walked by me entering Lowe’s. They said “ya gotta wear your mask BRO” I said very clearly “those masks don’t work bro, in fact they MAKE you sicker” the “pshh’d” me.
By now hopefully you all know CLOTH masks do not filter anything.
“You mean the American flag one my aunt made?” Yes.
“The one with sunflowers that looks so cute?” Yes.
“The bandanna, the cut up t-shirt, the scarf…” Yes.
ALL of them offer NO FILTERING whatsoever.
As you exhale you are ridding your lungs of contaminants and carbon dioxide. Cloth masks trap this carbon dioxide the best. It actually risks health. The moisture caught in these masks can become mildew ridden over night. Dry coughing, enhanced allergies, sore throat are all symptoms of a micro-mold in your mask.
Ultimate Answer: N95 blows the virus into the air from a contaminated person.
The surgical mask is not designed for the outside world and will not filter the virus upon inhaling through it. It’s filtration works on the exhale. (Like a vacuum bag it only works one way)
Cloth masks are WORSE than none.
The CDC wants us to keep wearing masks. The masks don’t work.
Wash your hands. Sanitize your hands. Don’t touch stuff. Wash your phone. Don’t touch people. And keep your distance. Why? . The masks do not work.
OSHA — the Occupational Safety & Health Administration — is cited as the top American organization for safety. They regulate and educate asbestos workers, surgical rooms, you name it.
If your mask gives you security wear it, just know it is a false sense of security.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) website plainly states that cloth face masks “Will not protect the wearer against airborne transmissible infectious agents due to loose fit and lack of seal or inadequate filtration.”
But, what about surgical masks? OHSA is clear here also that they “will not protect the wearer against airborne transmissible infectious agents due to loose fit and lack of seal or inadequate filtration.”
Wearing a face mask cannot protect you from getting COVID, but it is supposedly able to keep someone else from getting it from you? OSHA is speaking out of both sides of its mouth. What it calls “source control” likely puts the real motive out in the open: since you are the source, it’s about controlling YOU. There is no true scientific rationale for anyone but the sick and medical workers to wear masks.
Face masks lower the percentage of oxygen available for inhaling.
Normal fresh air contains 20.95% oxygen. OSHA defines an oxygen deficient atmosphere as an “atmosphere with an oxygen content below 19.5% by volume.” The reason we breath air is only for our lungs to harvest the oxygen it contains so that we don’t suffocate and die.
OSHA documents the effects of the first level of oxygen deficiency from 16% to 19.5%:
At concentrations of 16 to 19.5 percent, workers engaged in any form of exertion can rapidly become symptomatic as their tissues fail to obtain the oxygen necessary to function properly (Rom, W., Environmental and Occupational Medicine, 2nd ed.; Little, Brown; Boston, 1992). Increased breathing rates, accelerated heartbeat, and impaired thinking or coordination occur more quickly in an oxygen-deficient environment. Even a momentary loss of coordination may be devastating to a worker if it occurs while the worker is performing a potentially dangerous activity, such as climbing a ladder.
According to these scientists,
The influential Lancet review provided evidence from 172 studies in support of physical distancing of one metre or more. This might sound impressive, but all the studies were retrospective and suffer from biases that undermine the reliability of their findings. Recall bias arises in research when participants do not remember previous events accurately, and it is problematic when studies look back in time at how people behaved, including how closely they stood from others.
More concerning was that only five of the 172 studies reported specifically on Covid exposure and proximity with infection. These studies included a total of merely 477 patients, with just 26 actual cases of infection. In only one study was a specific distance measure reported: “came within six feet of the index patient”. The result showed no effect of distance on contracting Covid.
Heneghan and Jefferson further noted,
On further independent inspection of 15 studies included in the review, we found multiple inconsistencies in the data, numerical mistakes and unsound methods in 13 of them. When assumptions over distance were made, we could not replicate any of them.
This is the hallmark of modern pseudo-science: inconsistencies in the data, numerical mistakes, unsound methods and inability to replicate results.
What is the real purpose of social distancing? It certainly is not to curtail contagion. The only other possibility is to curtail economic activity and prevent social cohesion. Humans are social beings, after all, and lack of close proximity leads to depression, anxiety and even serious health consequences.
Contact tracing is an established practice in modern medicine. It is useful for the early stages of serious infectious diseases like Ebola, tuberculosis and sexually transmitted diseases like chlamydia.
Every credible expert on contact tracing says that it is effective only up to the point of mass distribution. In other words, during the early stages of a contagion or a slow moving or very serious disease.
In the case of COVID-19, the horse has already left the barn. Except to harass people, there is nothing useful that contact tracing can accomplish.
Yet, almost every state in America is implementing a wide-ranging contact tracing program that may ultimately employ some 300,000 tracers.
Because a law was passed in 2020 that allows state public health officials to automatically add every CDC recommended vaccine to the list of vaccines required for daycare and school entry—without public hearings or a vote by elected representatives in the legislature.
VLA Comment: This includes and confirms support for Bill Gates’s intention to put the Covid-19 RNA/DNA untested nanotech vaccine as mandatory for school children.